D&D 5E (2014) DMs, how do you fudge?

[Cadence]

Would y'all count the following as fudging: Changing the tactical prowess of the bad guys and the response of reinforcements based on how the combat is going?

 

[Oofta]

It is a reference to a cheesy line from an old TV show.

 

[iserith]

Would y'all count the following as fudging: Changing the tactical prowess of the bad guys and the response of reinforcements based on how the combat is going?

Not necessarily in my view, but it depends on the context. For me it comes down to what has already been established and why the DM is making that choice. If the tactically proficient enemies suddenly start being not tactically proficient because the PCs are getting stomped, then that's something akin to fudging. If it was established that reinforcements appear at certain intervals or given certain triggers and then they don't show up at those intervals or when those triggers occur because the PCs are getting stomped, then that's something akin to fudging. I say "something akin to fudging" simply because I hold to the definition of fudging in an RPG context as ignoring die results. Easing up on good tactics or reinforcements thus isn't technically the same thing in my opinion, but it ends up having the same effect so I avoid this practice.

Essentially it all comes down to the DM presenting stakes that they ultimately cannot accept. The answer for that is, in my view, don't do that in the first place. Then you don't have to fudge or ease up on the PCs.

 

[BookTenTiger]

The only way I fudge is changing encounters before they happen based on the pacing of the session.

For example, if we've had a ton of big fights, I might adjust the next encounter to have more opportunities for exploration or social solutions.

Or if we are 30 minutes from the end of a session, I might move an encounter to a further room or another location so that we can get in a little more character time before the next fight.

Otherwise I roll in the open, and I have house rules that allow characters to discover Hit Points, AC, etc. For me as a DM, it's fun to lay my cards on the table and let the players figure out how to overcome challenges.

 

[Adamant]

There's no option for "I love fudge as a dessert but don't fudge in other ways", despite having the option for not liking fudge as a dessert, so I voted other.

 

[Blue]

Nobody said it was about learning a lesson. But you can learn lessons while playing it. And games are probably the best tools we have to teach and learn. There's a whole billion market about it. So the it's just a game thing doesn't hold.

I'm sorry, there are thousands of valid ways to enjoy our hobby, and as "just a game" is a completely valid one. There's even a well known description of a "beer and pretzels" game showing there's a whole category of people who enjoy it so, and that's just very casual "just a game" games, not inclusive of all of the people who play it as "just a game".

It is not correct to assume it will always include other aspects like you are putting forth.

 

[GreyLord]

Would y'all count the following as fudging: Changing the tactical prowess of the bad guys and the response of reinforcements based on how the combat is going?

Yes, I do or would. It's not a bad thing though.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

I'm sorry, there are thousands of valid ways to enjoy our hobby, and as "just a game" is a completely valid one. There's even a well known description of a "beer and pretzels" game showing there's a whole category of people who enjoy it so, and that's just very casual "just a game" games, not inclusive of all of the people who play it as "just a game".

It is not correct to assume it will always include other aspects like you are putting forth.

All the other aspects that I'm putting forth are inherently part of games. Especially a game like D&D. Once again, to clear things up, I am not talking about learning concrete knowledge like learning to do math, or learn empathy (even though TTRPGs are also inherently good for that). I am also not talking about one person teaching someone else something.

I'm talking about the simple loop where you acquire new knowledge, new experiences while playing a game, you learn from it and you adjust the way you play. You use your Witch Bolt on an enemy that's quite fragile and it dies too soon, you realize that it's best used on enemies that are tougher. You fight a tough enemy, and one of your player dies, you realize that you didn't have all the information you needed to face it.

I introduced my niece (9 years old) to D&D three weeks go, and there's a ton of it. Just learning the core mechanics of the game changed her behaviour drastically within half an hour. Understanding that asking for riskier things will lead to a check which success chances depends on a number on her sheet made her change the way she played.

It can be knowledge outside the game: like understanding the rules, learning what type of players you're sitting with, what kind of DM you're playing with, etc. It can be knowledge in the game: how your abilities are best used, what happens when you make a certain choice, how ward a certain task is, what faction an NPC is part of. Players just learn things and they change the way they play. Even in a beer and pretzel game. That's just what humans do.

To bring things back on topic, and to what my initial point was. I think that fudging is in most cases bad for player agency, and that if it's something you do frequently and your players understand it unconciously, it will affect their behavior at the table. They might become careless, disinterested, frustrated; it depends on them and your type of play. But I fail to see what good reactions could come out of a player realizing the impact of his choices are being diluted.

 

[Minigiant]

I normalize my rolls.

If the monster roll 19 19 20 18 17, I roll in a low roll to break it up

Likewise I lower and raise HP to match the Players's expectations.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Would y'all count the following as fudging: Changing the tactical prowess of the bad guys and the response of reinforcements based on how the combat is going?

It's basically more interesting and elegant way to achieve the same thing.